Marion Potschin, Roy Haines-Young, Robert Fish, R. Kerry Turner, Marion Potschin, Roy Haines-Young, Robert Fish, R. Kerry Turner
This is a test
This is a test
Buch teilen
630 Seiten
English
ePUB (handyfreundlich)
Ăber iOS und Android verfĂŒgbar
eBook - ePub
Routledge Handbook of Ecosystem Services
Marion Potschin, Roy Haines-Young, Robert Fish, R. Kerry Turner, Marion Potschin, Roy Haines-Young, Robert Fish, R. Kerry Turner
Angaben zum Buch
Buchvorschau
Inhaltsverzeichnis
Quellenangaben
Ăber dieses Buch
The idea that nature provides services to people is one of the most powerful concepts to have emerged over the last two decades. It is shaping our understanding of the role that biodiverse ecosystems play in the environment and their benefits for humankind. As a result, there is a growing interest in operational and methodological issues surrounding ecosystem services amongst environmental managers, and many institutions are now developing teaching programmes to equip the next generation with the skills needed to apply the concepts more effectively.
This handbook provides a comprehensive reference text on ecosystem services, integrating natural and social science (including economics). Collectively the chapters, written by the world's leading authorities, demonstrate the importance of biodiversity for people, policy and practice. They also show how the value of ecosystems to society can be expressed in monetary and non-monetary terms, so that the environment can be better taken into account in decision making. The significance of the ecosystem service paradigm is that it helps us redefine and better communicate the relationships between people and nature. It is shown how these are essential to resolving challenges such as sustainable development and poverty reduction, and the creation of a green economy in developing and developed world contexts.
HĂ€ufig gestellte Fragen
Wie kann ich mein Abo kĂŒndigen?
Gehe einfach zum Kontobereich in den Einstellungen und klicke auf âAbo kĂŒndigenâ â ganz einfach. Nachdem du gekĂŒndigt hast, bleibt deine Mitgliedschaft fĂŒr den verbleibenden Abozeitraum, den du bereits bezahlt hast, aktiv. Mehr Informationen hier.
(Wie) Kann ich BĂŒcher herunterladen?
Derzeit stehen all unsere auf MobilgerĂ€te reagierenden ePub-BĂŒcher zum Download ĂŒber die App zur VerfĂŒgung. Die meisten unserer PDFs stehen ebenfalls zum Download bereit; wir arbeiten daran, auch die ĂŒbrigen PDFs zum Download anzubieten, bei denen dies aktuell noch nicht möglich ist. Weitere Informationen hier.
Welcher Unterschied besteht bei den Preisen zwischen den AboplÀnen?
Mit beiden AboplÀnen erhÀltst du vollen Zugang zur Bibliothek und allen Funktionen von Perlego. Die einzigen Unterschiede bestehen im Preis und dem Abozeitraum: Mit dem Jahresabo sparst du auf 12 Monate gerechnet im Vergleich zum Monatsabo rund 30 %.
Was ist Perlego?
Wir sind ein Online-Abodienst fĂŒr LehrbĂŒcher, bei dem du fĂŒr weniger als den Preis eines einzelnen Buches pro Monat Zugang zu einer ganzen Online-Bibliothek erhĂ€ltst. Mit ĂŒber 1 Million BĂŒchern zu ĂŒber 1.000 verschiedenen Themen haben wir bestimmt alles, was du brauchst! Weitere Informationen hier.
UnterstĂŒtzt Perlego Text-zu-Sprache?
Achte auf das Symbol zum Vorlesen in deinem nÀchsten Buch, um zu sehen, ob du es dir auch anhören kannst. Bei diesem Tool wird dir Text laut vorgelesen, wobei der Text beim Vorlesen auch grafisch hervorgehoben wird. Du kannst das Vorlesen jederzeit anhalten, beschleunigen und verlangsamen. Weitere Informationen hier.
Ist Routledge Handbook of Ecosystem Services als Online-PDF/ePub verfĂŒgbar?
Ja, du hast Zugang zu Routledge Handbook of Ecosystem Services von Marion Potschin, Roy Haines-Young, Robert Fish, R. Kerry Turner, Marion Potschin, Roy Haines-Young, Robert Fish, R. Kerry Turner im PDF- und/oder ePub-Format sowie zu anderen beliebten BĂŒchern aus Scienze biologiche & Ecosistemi e Habitat. Aus unserem Katalog stehen dir ĂŒber 1Â Million BĂŒcher zur VerfĂŒgung.
Marion Potschin, Roy Haines-Young, Robert Fish and R. Kerry Turner
DOI: 10.4324/9781315775302-1
Your true modern is separate from the land by many middlemen, and by innumerable physical gadgets. He [sic.] has no vital relation to it; to him it is the space between cities on which crops grow. Turn him loose for a day on the land, and if the spot does not happen to be a golf links or a âscenicâ area, he is bored sjpgf. If crops could be raised by hydroponics instead of farming, it would suit him very well. Synthetic substitutes for wood, leather, wool, and other natural land products suit him better than the originals. In short, land is something he has âoutgrown.â
The Land Ethic from âA Sand County Almanacâ, Aldo Leopold, 1948
Introduction
Around 2008, the human population passed something of a milestone. For the first time there were more people living in cities than in rural areas. Looking forward, it is estimated that by 2050 roughly two-thirds of the nine or so billion people that inhabit the Earth will be urban dwellers (UNFPA, 2007). It is also projected that the absolute numbers of people living in the countryside will decline, compared to the present.
That we are becoming a predominantly urban species, and that all future population growth will be in built-up areas, will have many consequences. The outlook for human well-being is likely to be positive in many important respects, because there are generally better employment prospects in cities, and better access to education and health services. The United Nations Population Fund argues that social mobility in cities is greater and the chances that women can take control of their lives are greater. As a result, they suggest, fertility rates in urban areas are likely to reduce, and this will change trajectory of overall population growth.1 But there will be other consequences, too. The fact that societies depend fundamentally on natural systems may be readily masked and obscured by the experience of city living. Many critical traditions have argued in the vein of Leopold that, with urbanity, nature is often remade as a distant âotherâ; as merely background scenery for cultural processes; and as a set of commodities that conceal, or at best stylise, their origins in natural processes. While we may say that this model of spatial organisation makes society less vulnerable to environmental hazards, an appreciation of the ties that bind people and nature together will arguably be more difficult to sustain. Our planet will become no less finite just because most people will be living in cities.
The problem of the changing connection between people with nature is the one we want to address in this chapter. In thinking about this, and in particular what it means for the ecosystem services debate in the 21st century, we were reminded of Leopoldâs thoughts about the âtrue modernâ. From our current perspective, we can imagine that not only will the future descendants of the âtrue modernâ be less able to see the âvital relationâ that he or she has with ecosystem function, but also, since the âgolf linksâ and âscenic areaâ are now likely to be regarded as âvaluable cultural ecosystem servicesâ, the prospect of changing his or her mind may be even more remote.
Of course, it is not inevitable that Leopoldâs description of the âtrue modernâ will apply in the future. The prospect is very much dependent on the kinds of narratives that people develop to describe their lives and the societies that they inhabit â which is why the idea of ecosystem services and the importance of natural capital may have particular significance for Homo urbanus. In this chapter we will examine the history of the idea of ecosystem services, and argue that while it is an idea shaped by thinking at the end of the last century, it can continue to be relevant â providing we can connect it into wider debates about what people care about.
Histories
In their âfragmentary historyâ of ecosystem services, Mooney and Ehrlich (1997) attribute the first use of the term âecosystem servicesâ to Extinction: The Causes and Consequences of the Disappearance of Species (Ehrlich and Ehrlich, 1981). However, they also recognise the idea that ecosystems can be thought of as providing âservicesâ to people can be found in the literature long before the particular phrase was used. They note, for example, the account of âenvironmental servicesâ a decade earlier in the Study of Critical Environmental Problems (SCEP, 1970), and ideas of the âpublic-servicesâ that can be provided by the global environment as described in Ehrlich and Holdren (1974) and other papers published around that time â not to mention the account of ânatureâs servicesâ provided by Westman (1977).
In their history of the concept and its link with economic valuation of the environment, GĂłmez-Baggethun et al. (2010) agree with Mooney and Ehrlich (1997) that while the impact of human actions on the way nature can benefit people was discussed by writers even in ancient civilisations, it was probably the publication of Man and Nature in 1864 by George Perkins Marsh that stimulated interest in modern times. It is from Marshâs work that we can see some of the central themes of contemporary debates about ecosystem services being rehearsed, namely the finite capacity of the earth, its limitations in providing benefits to people, and its vulnerability to human action.
As Lowenthal (2000, p.3) argues, a noteworthy feature of Man and Nature âwas Marshâs stress on the unforeseen and unintended consequences, as well as the heedless greed, of technological enterpriseâ. Marsh contended that, to sustain global resources, society needed to become aware of how it affected them (Lowenthal, 2000). While the term âecosystem servicesâ did not enter scienjpgic discourse until 1981, the idea that people directly benefit from nature, and that natureâs capacity to support these benefits is limited, was thus already common currency. Indeed, the idea was shaping not only conservation debates but also institutional responses.
For example, in a âWorldwatchâ paper of 1978, we find Eckholm discussing the significance of the loss of species âwhose ecological functions are especially important to societyâ. He cautions: âAt the broadest level, extinctions serve as markers of the general reduction in the capacity of the earthâs biological systems to provide goods and crucial, if subtle, ecological servicesâ (Eckholm, 1978, p.18, authorâs emphasis). In 1980 the IUCN World Conservation Strategy explicitly used the notion of goods and services provided by ecosystems in the section on âpolicy making and the integration of conservation and developmentâ, where it is used in connection with sustainable forest management, and in the section on âenvironmental planning and rational use of resourcesâ, where it is discussed more generally in the context of how to use ecosystem assessments to help allocate resource use (IUCN, 1980). Despite the passage of nearly four decades, the assessment framework that they proposed (Figure 1.1) remains highly applicable and consistent with current thinking.
What is perhaps surprising when we look back is that despite this early interest the idea of ecosystem services was given little attention in the âBrundtland Reportâ of 1987. Reference is made to the idea only once, when the Report deals with species and ecosystems in the context of resources for development, and where it is noted that âspecies and natural ecosystems make many important contributions to human welfareâ (World Commission for Environment and Development, 1987, p. 125). The report observes that these resources are often not used in ways that will be able to meet the demands for the âgoods and services that depend upon these natural resourcesâ. Background reports to the Commission did, however, emphasise the importance of natural resources and natural processes which affect human well-being (Turner, 1989). Nevertheless, the point was taken up more fully in Agenda 21. This was a key and influential output from the Earth Summit in 1992 and which set out the United Nationâs action plan for delivering on sustainable development. In the discussion on âcombatting deforestationâ, the document echoes the points made in the World Conservation Strategy on the role of wood and non-wood goods and services as a component of sustainable forest management. Perhaps more importantly, when addressing the conservation of biodiversity, Agenda 21 charges us to âtake measures to encourage a greater understanding and appreciation of the value of biological diversity, as manifested both in its component parts and in the ecosystem services providedâ (United Nations, 1992, sect. 15.5.m). The development of integrated environmental and economic accounting methods was seen as one necessary step. The aim was to expand national accounting systems so that they better measured the â⊠crucial role of the environment as a source of natural capital âŠâ (United Nations, 1992, sect. 8.41). Another key action idenjpgied in Agenda 21 was the development of a âscience for sustainable developmentâ, in which scienjpgic knowledge is applied âthrough scienjpgic assessments of current conditions and future prospects for the Earth systemâ (United Nations, 1992, sect. 35.3).
Mooney and Ehrlich (1997) describe how biodiversity assessment approaches were developed in the 1990s, eventually as part of wider related initiatives such as the Global Biodiversity Assessment of UNEP, which integrated economic and ethical issues with biodiversity science (UNEP, 1995; Perrings et al., 1995). However, despite such advances, there was a wider recognition that the new findings emerging from ecology and related fields were poorly reflected in policy discussions. A key part of the debate was the publication of Protecting our Planet, Securing our Future: Linkages among Global Environmental Issues and Human Needs, in 1998. This was the output of an international study sponsored by UNEP, NASA, and the World Bank.
Importantly, Protecting our Planet called for more integrative assessments âthat can highlight the linkages between questions relevant to climate, biodiversity, deserjpgication, and forest issuesâ (Watson et al., 1998, p.56). It provided some of the impetus2 for the 2005 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA), an examination of the consequences of ecosystem change for human well-being, and a key influence on the early mainstreaming of the ecosystem services agenda (Daily et al., 2011, p.3). Significant institutional factors were, however, perhaps more decisive: the work associated with a number of international agreements such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the Convention to Combat Deserjpgication, the Convention on Migratory Species, and the Ramsar Convention, had shown that the needs for scienjpgic assessments within the conventions were not being met. And so the foundations of the MA were laid. It became one of the key initiatives to help achieve the United Nations Millennium Development Goals and to carry out the Plan of Implementation for the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development.
As the result of the stimulus of the MA, national assessments have been made in a number of countries, including New Zealand, France, Spain, Portugal, and Israel.3 The UK Government has also funded two national ecosystem assessments and set up a formal Natural Capital Committee4 to audit societyâs use of ecosystem services (UK, NEA, 2011; UKNEA FO, 2014). Most significantly, the Inter-Governmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services has now been established5 to continue to review, assess, and evaluate the growing knowledge base that has developed around the topic, and crucially to improve the capacity for using that knowledge effectively in decision-making. With its formal endorsement by the science and policy communities, the aim is to give as strong and credible a voice to issues surrounding biodiversity and ecosystem services as has bee...